search

win32ss / supermium

Chromium fork for Windows XP/2003 and up
https://win32subsystem.live/supermium/
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
2.18k stars 72 forks source link

Supermium 126 does not start on Windows XP SP2 without deleting the file C:\Program Files\Supermium\DWrite.dll #881

Open EgorKuzevanov opened 1 week ago

EgorKuzevanov commented 1 week ago

Supermium 126 does not start on Windows XP SP2 (released August 6, 2004). When double-clicking the Supermium desktop shortcut, a single process chrome.exe appears in the Windows Task Manager and disappears after 30 seconds. No error messages are displayed and no crash dumps are created. Supermium 126 starts only after deleting the file C:\Program Files\Supermium\DWrite.dll.

I have an Acer Aspire One ZG5 netbook (released in 2008) with a 32-bit single-core dual-threaded Intel Atom N270 processor (1.6 GHz), 1.5 GB of RAM and an Intel GMA 950 integrated graphics card.

win32ss, please provide DirectWriteCore compatibility with Windows XP SP1 (released September 9, 2002) and Windows XP SP2 (released August 6, 2004).

FK2FAGHMS commented 1 week ago

That CPU won't experience performance degradation in SP3. Install SP3 instead. But it still won't run well anyway due to low performance CPU and low amount of RAM. You'd better look for alternatives like 32-bit Linux distribution with LXDE (LXLE in my mind) if you only want to browse the web.

EgorKuzevanov commented 1 week ago

That CPU won't experience performance degradation in SP3. Install SP3 instead. But it still won't run well anyway due to low performance CPU and low amount of RAM. You'd better look for alternatives like 32-bit Linux distribution with LXDE (LXLE in my mind) if you only want to browse the web.

I'm not going to give up Windows XP SP2. Moreover, calls to switch to Linux are out of place in GitHub repository of Supermium browser, which is designed for older versions of Windows.

FK2FAGHMS commented 1 week ago

"Older versions of Windows" doesn't mean "older versions of older versions of Windows". If you're going to use an older version of Windows, at least use the newest version of it. Windows 2000 (wtf really?) > SP4 (Not supported by Supermium yet, but if it does, DON'T attempt to go lower than that) Windows XP > SP3 Windows Vista > SP2 Windows 7 > SP1 Windows 8 > 8.1 Doing otherwise also makes the developer's work harder, due to versions he's going to have to support. If you want a stable browser, at least help it by reducing the amount of versions it has to work on!

EgorKuzevanov commented 1 week ago

win32ss, please permanently ban user FK2FAGHMS! He hates Windows XP pre-SP3, Windows Vista pre-SP2 and Windows 7 SP0!

mina354 commented 1 week ago

"Older versions of Windows" doesn't mean "older versions of older versions of Windows". If you're going to use an older version of Windows, at least use the newest version of it. Windows 2000 (wtf really?) > SP4 (Not supported by Supermium yet, but if it does, DON'T attempt to go lower than that) Windows XP > SP3 Windows Vista > SP2 Windows 7 > SP1 Windows 8 > 8.1 Doing otherwise also makes the developer's work harder, due to versions he's going to have to support. If you want a stable browser, at least help it by reducing the amount of versions it has to work on!

I hope you do realize that not everyone likes to run the latest service pack/version of a Windows release, and they have reasons for that. Supermium already runs on Windows Vista RTM, Windows 7 RTM and Windows 8 (not 8.1!) anyway. Our issue here in this issue is Supermium Windows XP < SP3 compatibility.

And yes, really, Supermium will support Windows 2000.

win32ss commented 1 week ago

I will not ban anyone for suggesting any service pack or not. Although SP2 is still on the more bloated side of XP (RTM/SP1 are snappier on PII/PIII systems than SP2/SP3).

But I will still address any issue related to my recent dependency changes in DWrite/associated CRT files. It appears some problems have occurred as a result, also affecting SP3, but still not reproducible.

EgorKuzevanov commented 1 week ago

Although SP2 is still on the more bloated side of XP (RTM/SP1 are snappier on PII/PIII systems than SP2/SP3).

win32ss, since it so happened that on CPUs without SSE/SSE2 Windows XP SP0/SP1 work faster than Windows XP SP2/SP3, then I suggest you release parallel 32-bit builds of the Supermium and Superfox browsers for SSE-only CPUs (Intel Pentium 3 or AMD Athlon XP level) and CPUs without SSE (Intel Pentium 2, AMD K6-2, AMD K6-III or AMD Athlon level). Moreover, support for Windows 2000 without Extended Kernel in the Supermium and Superfox browsers is coming, and Windows 2000 is even more optimized for CPUs without SSE/SSE2 than Windows XP.

Zero3K commented 1 week ago

Maybe fixing https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/874 will also fix this issue.

FK2FAGHMS commented 1 week ago

You @EgorKuzevanov and @mina354 seem to have serious problems, and I'm not going to bother with them. Running modern web browsers on a single core processor is torture and you seem to be a masochist (unless you don't have any other choice). You can even run it on Windows XP RTM or Beta, I don't care anymore. But don't come and complain here when it doesn't work because I want @win32ss to focus on more important stuff, like "missing video decoder support" or "Windows XP SP3 Cloudflare loop error", rather than this non-sense!